Posted on: 11 Jul 2021
Note: This article is meant for intellectuals only
Part-1 Part-2 Part-3 Part-4 Part-5 Part-6 Part-7 Part-8 Part-9
Swāmi continued:- When we say that fire is burning some material, fire is the subject (Pramātā), the flames are the instrument used for burning (Pramāṇam), the burning is the result (Pramā) and the burnt material is the object (prameya). The subject is knower, the mind is the instrument used to know, the knowledge is the result and the knowable item is the object. Here, except the external knowable object the other three (subject, instrument and result) are awareness only. Sometimes, the object may be internal like the thought of an item. In such case, all the four are awareness only. Even the knowledge existing in the form of pulses is energy or awareness only as in the case of chip storing the information or the electro-magnetic disk in the computer. For the generation of awareness inert energy and materialized nervous system are essential without which you can’t even imagine the generation of awareness.
Before the creation of this world, there was neither energy nor matter (for the formation of materialized nervous system) and hence, awareness can’t exist because awareness is the specific work form of inert energy that is generated in a specific system called brain-nervous system. In the absence of awareness neither the knower, nor mind, nor the knowledge and nor the internal object (thoughts of plan of creation) could exist in God. In absence of these four, the process of thinking is impossible. But, still, God thought to create this world and planned it. In such case the knower, the instrument of knowledge, knowledge and the internal plans (object) must be unimaginable in the view of absence of awareness. Any number of unimaginable items must result as one unimaginable item only and hence, all these four can be concluded as one unimaginable God.
God is said to be material as well as intellectual cause for the world. God does not quantitatively decrease after generating the universe and hence, even the process of creation is unimaginable and logic applying to the imaginable world fails. From the lump of clay, if some part is converted in to pot, the original lump of clay is reduced in quantity. But, God does not decrease in quantity due to creation. This is again another support for the unimaginable God. He remains as He is and still the world is generated. A magician generating magic without any self-modification can be considered here as the suitable example neglecting his pre-tricks. In this way, there is no second example to understand the process of creation of world by God and such unique status of God clearly speaks that this process of creation of world is unimaginable. In such case, the word ‘awareness’ has no meaning to be used in the case of God since the awareness of a human being is generated from energy and matter. If we used the word ‘awareness,’ we mean simply that God thought like this and in such case, such awareness must be called as unimaginable awareness because, the imaginable awareness of an imaginable human being involves the awareness, which is the specific work form of inert energy generated in specific materialized nervous system.
Therefore, the non-mediated unimaginable God can’t be compared with the soul in any aspect. One is unimaginable and the other is imaginable and the commonality is zero. In such unique case, you shall not try to bring even a trace of commonality. If you take the mediated God to be compared with the soul, you can find some commonality that too for the name sake only, which is also zero in effective sense. The mediated God before merge with unimaginable God is simply a medium, which can have lot of comparison. Even this comparison is subjected to some difference because even the souls differ from each other in their capacities. If you neglect the difference in capacities, souls have similarity of material component. Whatever may be capacity of a soul, every soul is made of the same material called awareness. In this way, you can bring some comparison between the mediated God and soul. If you take ocean and its wave, there is a similarity of the material component called water. If you take the mediated God as seen in cosmic vision, such God is ocean and the soul is a wave.
The commonality between ocean and wave is the material component, which is water. In the case of ocean and wave the difference between the energy associated with ocean and the energy associated with wave differ quantitatively maintaining the commonality of the same phase of imaginable power. But, when you compare mediated God with the soul, such commonality of imaginable power is also absent because the power of the mediated God is of unimaginable nature (derived from the merged unimaginable God) whereas the power of the soul is of imaginable nature only. This means that the power of mediated God is not only quantitatively very large in comparison with power of the soul but also the power of mediated God is unimaginable doing miracles and the power of the soul is imaginable, which is unable to do miracles. Hence, when you compare mediated God with the soul, the only name sake similarity is that both have the same material component of body and soul. Before merge of the unimaginable God with the medium, the medium is exactly similar to the soul (if you neglect the potential difference which exists in various souls). But, once the merge with unimaginable God takes place, the medium becomes exactly the unimaginable God in not only infinite quantity of the power but also in the nature of power because the imaginable nature of the power of the medium becomes unimaginable due to merge. Based on the above single commonality of material content that mediated God as well as the human being are made of energy and matter, the similarity between the mediated God and the human being can be retained only in the material component.
This commonality of material component is accepted by the unimaginable God because He wants to appear to the souls through this common material component. Except this one purpose, the similarity between God and soul is always zero. This similarity of material component is the basis for the three great Vedic sentences (I am God, You are God and he/she is God). The difference between God and soul is everywhere except that one single aspect, which is the commonality of the material content between mediated God and soul (the word soul is used in the sense of human being and hence, soul here means mediated soul). The first great Vedic sentence says that Prajñānam or excellent spiritual knowledge is God. It is the horrible pity to take the word Prajñānam in the sense of basic awareness or chit. Even the word Jnñānam or knowledge is greater than awareness or chit. Prajñānam is greater than Jñānam also. This first sentence does not mean that awareness is God (Prajñānam Brahma). This only means that when the mediated God enters the creation, He will be preaching excellent spiritual knowledge, which can’t be preached by any human being. This first sentence indicates the difference between mediated God and soul.
When this is the background of comparison between mediated God and soul, trying for commonality to bring total monism is the highest foolish effort. Between a king and a beggar there is some good extent of commonality in 1) the material content of the soul and body and 2) the imaginable nature of the power of the soul and body even though quantitative difference exists, one will laugh if you try to bring monism through such foolish effort, which is that since ‘I’ is common (since the king says “I am the king” and the beggar says “I am the beggar”). In such case, you can’t imagine the similarity between mediated God and soul also even though you take the name sake similarity of material content and you can’t even dream about the similarity between the absolute unimaginable God and the relatively imaginable soul.
The monism between God and soul shall not be aspired by the soul. In fact, the soul shall not aspire anything from God and this is the climax of true devotion. Anything including the perfect monism shall be given by God to the soul and shall not be aspired by the soul even in the dream. If such aspiration to become God exists, the soul will not get even a trace of grace from God. If nothing is aspired from God, that alone is the climax of true love to God. In such case only, if there is some need of work for the welfare of the world to be done through a soul, God merges with such a soul to make the soul as God. Hence, monism is not impossible by itself, but, it becomes impossible as long as you aspire for it. Telling that every soul is God is like introducing communist policy in spiritual knowledge. Such policy is correct as far as the materialism is concerned but, not as far as the spiritual field is concerned.
The monism between God and soul is not objectionable to God as long as it is not misused by the soul to harm other souls. If the monism is used for developing self-confidence and for reducing the mental tensions, even God welcomes it. If the son exploits the name of the father for some selfish welfare, the father will not mind it and in fact, feels happy. The father becomes angry only when his name is misused to harm others in the world. In this process of achieving monism, the biggest blunder is done in the end only. By tremendously beautiful analysis the monistic philosopher achieves the relative imaginable awareness only and not the absolute unimaginable awareness. The difference is that this achieved relative awareness can’t do miracles in this relatively real world having equal status with the soul whereas the absolute awareness can do miracles in this relatively real world having lower status with God. In this way, the Advaita philosopher, who preached about illusion of snake over the rope is falling under the same illusion in the end by mistaking the achieved relative awareness as the absolute awareness.
The soul in the human being exists only in awaken state and in dream state. The soul is disappearing in the deep sleep. In deep sleep, the long rest of the body (especially of the non-functioning nervous system) is experienced as soon as the soul appears in the immediate awaken state. The happiness of this long rest is experienced by the soul appearing at the end of the deep sleep and the soul was not experiencing this during deep sleep. When the nervous system does not function, the awareness is not at all generated just like the grinding work is not generated when the grinding machine stops functioning. In the absence of awareness, it is foolish to say that the individual soul (or loosely called as ‘soul’) exists. It is born and is dead every day (Nitya jātam…– Gītā). The Advaita philosopher says that the soul or awareness exists in deep sleep also experiencing the absence of everything other than itself. If this is correct, the soul shall experience about itself at least in the deep sleep. In the awaken state by effort the soul can experience the absence of everything other than itself, but, in this state, the soul is experiencing about itself. When the self-experience itself is absent, it is highly laughable to say that the soul is experiencing the absence of everything other than itself! But, the Veda (Māṇḍūkya Upaniṣat) says about the knower (Prājña) experiencing bliss (Ānanda) in deep sleep. You must note that the knower in the deep sleep is suddenly praised as the creator of the universe (Viśvasya yoniḥ). If the deep sleep mentioned here refers to the soul of human being as explained in the earlier two stages (awaken and dream), the soul in the subsequent deep sleep can’t suddenly become the creator of the universe. The next fourth state (Turīya) also doesn’t connect itself to the soul of ordinary human being.
In Turīya state, the unimaginable God is fully described, who can never be the imaginable ordinary soul unless the case of human incarnation comes. Hence, these four states refer to the human incarnation in which the soul is God due to perfect merge with God. The two beginning states also are common to the human incarnation like the case of human being. Hence, based on the prior two states, you can’t fix this as an example of human being. Hence, the quotation of Śaṅkara, which is that the soul achieved in deep sleep is God (Suṣuptyeka siddhaḥ) can be also well explained in the context of human incarnation and not in the context of ordinary human soul. In the case of ordinary human being, the soul itself disappears totally and it can be achieved only at the end of the deep sleep. Only in the case of incarnation, the individual soul (Jīva) is God (Brahman) and not in the case of every ordinary human being (Jīvo brahmaiva nāparaḥ - Śaṅkara).